E-Voting in Brazil - The Risks to Democracy

                    We human rights defenders must always keep our fighting for justice, democracy and human rights. The right to reparation when systematic violations of human rights is hapenning is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.        This post is a summary of the report written after research by professors at the Federal University of Paraiba, Brazil and Acadia University, Nova Scotia, Canada.  The title of the report is above and was published at https://oro.open.ac.uk/12543/1/12543.pdf

                          Literature has shown that countries with strong democratic traditions are not yet using eletronic voting systems, given citizens and policy makers' concern about the security of such systems. To date, commercially available technology requires an infrastructure that poses complex technical challenges for reliability and security. E-voting technology does not yet provide a completely "secure e-transaction environment". Some authors claim that e-voting will never be error-free and that it is nice in theory, but that in practice, the risks are too large. Given the lack of security of e-voting systems, what are the risks of e-voting to democracy when the systems are introduced? Can less mature democracies such as those in Latin America, be reinforced with the adoption of e-voting systems? The contradictions are apparent: most countries in the developed world have held off adopting e-voting systems given their concerns about security and their knowledge of the implications of insecure systems for democracy. The controversis over e-voting are under way and e-voting technologies failures have been documented. Scientists started to worry about computer voting systems and numerous reports have found them vulnerable to "error" and tampering. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how the introduction of e-voting in Brazil is highly risky to democracy due to the lack of emphasis on security and the lack of a socially-informed and socially driven approach to technological innovation. Brazil was the first country in the world to conduct its biggest election using e-voting tech. The e-voting technology deployed in Brazil is a direct recording eletronic voting system;--- it has been judged by Brazilian experts as being more vulnerable to tampering than any another voting system. For some eletronic voting experts, the Electoral Justice has opened the doors for new and sophisticated fraud, more serious than the traditional kind. Many reports in the U.S., articulate the risks of this technology, corroborating with what Brazilian academics and scientists say. In the U.S. the controversies over e-voting are not stifled, e-voting tech failures have been registered all over. A recent study carried out by the OECD confirms that, if governments do not learn how to manage the risks of information technology, the eletronic dreams will become global nightmares. In developed countries, resistance to e-voting has been consistent. Without a market for e-voting systems in the developed world, corporate actors have turned to developing countries. Just as pharmaceutical companies whose medicine do not pass the FDA's criteria push their market nets in the south hemisphere. While Diebold, the eletronic voting machine maker, is so questioned in the U.S., in Brazil it has the largest contract in its history by selling e-voting machines to the Brazilian government. If both e-voting and e-democracy are conceived and adopted based on popular demand, then the efficiency of traditional democratic electoral processes may be enhanced. However, if e-voting technology is introduced as a supply-driven operation, it is imperative to identify and assess the risks to democracy. It seems that the e-voting system in Brazil has been risky business. Democracy is at stake. Health and social welfare are on the line, subject to cutbacks despite growing needs. Technological hubris and market imperatives have driven the evolution of the digital society, with important democratic implications. Appropriate technological processes can reverse this trend in a way that ensures that we are not travelling along the path of least resistance.

Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders - Part II

             We human rights defenders can't let threats about the creation of lies stop us fighting for justice, democracy, political and civil rights. The right to reparation when violations of human rights hapenned is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos.    Carry on with the same book from last week. This post is a summary of the book with the title above published at http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/criminalization2016.pdf

                The Commission has received information that many of the criminal proceedings that are initiated against human rights defenders are slow or accelerated, in an unreasonable manner in order to hinder their work at a crucial time for the causes they defend and to intimidate them personally, which also has an intimidating effect that extends to other human rights defenders that could instill fear of suffering the same fate if they continue their work in defense of human rights. For example, some organizations have expressed their concern before the Commission over the speed with which arrest warrants and other measures to the detriment of human rights defenders are issued. In contrast, the processes opened to investigate acts of harassment committed against defenders, are often undertaken without celerity and procedural efficiency. The misuse of the criminal law against human rights defenders generates among them a number of negative impacts at a personal and collective level, affecting their physical health and generating effects at the family and social level. The Commission believes the condition of being a human rights defnder is particularly important whether a process has respected the guarantee of a reasonable timeframe, given the affection that occurs over time in the legal situation of the defender. Furthermore, the Commission has learned that defenders not only have been subjected to lengthy criminal proceedings based on criminal offenses contrary to the standards of international law but, in some cases, have also been charged with crimes based on false and fabricated evidence without the defenders having engaged in unlawful conduct. The Commission has noted that initiation of criminal proceedings against defenders implies, in some cases, issuing preventive measures such as remand, bail, the obligation to appear periodically before a court, and/or a ban on leaving the country. The Commission has also been informed that some countries have issued measures such as the inability to attend certain meetings or places. The main impact of criminalization through the misuse of criminal law is on the right to defend human rights. Criminalization not only affects the criminally prosecuted defender, who must invest time and resources in his procedural defense, neglecting his work, but also generates an intimidating and chilling effect on other defenders who for fear retaliation may refrain from doing their work of promoting and protecting human rights. This affects society as a whole, given that the defenders promote complaints, present claims and make demands at the social and collective level that contribute to the realization of the rule of law and democracy by combating impunity. The Commission has identified that some States have issued directives to guide the actions of justice operators and considers this a good practice to avoid misuse of criminal law gaginst human rights defenders. For example, in Colombia various types of guidelines have been adopted to guide the action of the Attorney General Office, making it more efficient and providing security to victims and the accused. Based on the information and analysis conducted by the Commission throughout this report, and in order to promote the full use of international standards to guide States on lines of action to address criminalization through the misuse of criminal law, the IACHR recommends to the American States: 1) To ensure that the authorities do not use the punitive power of the States to harass human rights defenders. States must adopt all necessary measures, through judicial investigations, to prevent HR defenders from being subjected to unjust or unfounded trials.  2) To adopt all necessary legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure the effective guarantee of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the American Convention and in particular, the right to defend rights.  To achieve these objectives, the IACHR urges States to comply with the following specific recommendations:  3) Acknowledge publicly and unequivocally the fundamental role played by HR defenders to guarantee democracy and the rule of law in society, whose commitment is reflected in all levels of government. This can be achieved through special programs, the granting of awards, ceremonies, press releases or other measures that make visible the work of defenders and demonstrate their value and importance to society.  4) Undertake education and dissemination activities directed towards all States agents, society and the media, to sensitize them on the legitimacy of the work of promotion and defense of human rights, as well as the importance and value of the work of HR defenders and their organizations, as their actions do not weaken the States but strengthen it, taking into account for that the international instruments referred to this subject.  5) Instruct government authorities to ensure that, from the highest-level space for open dialogue with human rights organizations are created to receive their feedback regarding existing policies and the effect of such policies on their works, as well as on legislative gaps.  7) Refrain from making statements that stigmatize HR defenders and that suggest that defenders, as well as HR organizations, act illegally, merely for carrying out of their work to protect human rights. 8) Ensure that criminal offenses included in their legislation are formulated in a manner consistent with the principle of legality. That is, expressly, precisely, comprehensively with a clear definition of the criminalized conduct, establishing its elements and allowing it to be differentiated from behavior that are not punishable or punishable with non-penal measures. 10) Promote the modification of laws on criminal defamation to eliminate the use of criminal procedure to protect honor and reputation when information on matters of public interest, public officials, or candidates for public office is disseminated.  11) Decriminalize defamation and promote the modification of ambiguous or vague criminal laws disproportionately limiting freedom of expression, such as those designed to protect the honor of institutions, in order to eliminate the use of criminal proceedings yo inhibit the free democratic debate on all matters of public interest.  18) Ensure that any intelligence activity that is carried out, especially when a HR defender is involved or subject to the operation, has the proper prior authorization, with clear limits pre-established by law, and is performed under the supervision of other authorities who periodically issue reports on its activities.  22) To promote that judges strictly abide by the dispositions of criminal law, and observe the rigor in considering whether the behavior of the person incriminated falls within the description of the criminal offense, in order not to incur in the criminalization of the legitimate activities of HR defenders.  Guarantee the right access to justice, which implies that anyone who is subjected to a judicial proceeding must be able to obtain a final decision from the courts without undue delays arising from the lack of diligence and care.  24) Faced with an abusive and baseless criminal complaint, investigate the individual responsible for promoting such complaint, in order to clarify the facts.   29) Ensure that the detention of HR defenders be brought before a judicial review in order to avoid arbitrary or unlawful detention.  30) Adopt the necessary steps to stop all illegal detentions, as well as the isolation, ill-treatment and other violations of due process that may arise in the context of the detention of a HR defender.  41) Implement campaigns for public recognition of the important role that defenders exercise in guaranteeing democracy and the rule of law in society.  43) Strengthen the justice mechanisms and guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judicial operators, which are necessary conditions for the legitimate and nondiscriminatory application of the laws.

Criminalization of Human Rights Defenders

                   We human rights defenders can't let threats about the creation of lies stop us fighting for justice, democracy, political and civil rights. The right to reparation when violations of human rights hapenned is essential part of the justice demanded by the world.  Since the creation of this blog in 2010, its counter of visualizations doesn't work and the same is happening with my YouTube channel since its creation in 2020. For no reason,  I'm being  harmed in so many ways and for so long. Why can I not have a YouTube channel and blog with their counter of visualizations working like everyone else? If you want to know my channel and see a small sample of the huge worldwide movement for justice, democracy and political rights, watch my videos, here is the link   https://www.youtube.com/@lucianofietto4773/videos. This post is a summary of the book with the title above published in December of 2015 at https://www.oas.org/en/iachr/reports/pdfs/criminalization2016.pdf

                      This report addresses the problem of the misuse of criminal law by State and non-state actors with the aim to criminalize the work of human rights defenders. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has continued to receive alarming reports of a trend indicating that human rights defenders in various contexts are systematically subjected to unfounded criminal proceedings in order to paralyze or delegitimize their causes. This report conceptualizes the phenomenon of criminalization and identifies the contexts and groups of defenders who are most affected by this practice, as well as the actors who usually participate in the processes of criminalization through the misuse of criminal law. Additionally, the IACHR identifies the main forms of criminalization against human rights defenders and the obligations that States must observe in criminal proceedings to prevent them from becoming tools to hinder the defense of human rights. According to information received, the misuse of criminal law most often occurs in contexts where there are tensions or conflicts of interest with the State and non-state actors. The IACHR has also noted that there are certain groups of defenders who have been more frequently the target of these forms of criminalization due to the causes they advance or the content of their demands. The Commission has found that criminalization processes usually begins with the filing of baseless allegations or complaints based on criminal offenses that do not conform to the principle of legality. In recent years, through its continuous monitoring work, the IACHR has noticed a growing actions taken to prevent, obstruct, and discourage the defense of human rights. One of the actions frequently reported to the IACHR is the adoption and misapplication of the law to the detriment of human rights defenders in order to obstruct their activities. Based on these considerations, given that criminal law is the means available to the state for establishing liability for unlawful conduct, this report will focus on the various forms of manipulation of the punitive power, and what the IACHR refers to as the criminalization and misuse of criminal law. Human Rights Defenders are individuals who any way promote the realization of human rights. This concept also covers justice operators as defenders of the access to justice for victims of violations of their rights. The recognition of the right to defend rights has expanded. For its part, the IACHR has emphasized that "the defense of human rights not only serves civil and political rights, but covers the monitoring, reporting, and education of economic and social rights. The IACHR has emphasized that the work of human rights defenders is fundamental for the universal implementation of human rights and for the full existence of democracy and the rule of law. In this regard, the IACHR has recommended that States publicly recognize that the promotion of human rights are legitimate actions and foster a human rights culture in which the role played by human rights defenders in guaranteeing democracy is recognized publicly. Human Rights (HR) defenders have also been victims of criminalization after filing complaints against public officials for alleged corruption or in the pursuit of the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of cases of grave human rights violations and breaches of humanitarian law by State. In this regard, the IACHR has recognized the efforts of the victims, family members, H.R. defenders and civil society organizations and their contribution to the right to the truth regarding human rights violations, as their activity is essential in the search for the right to the truth. The Commission has observed that defenders are often criminalized for the activities they carry out in the defense of human rights and are subject to criminal proceedings that are initiated against them following complaints that come from both State officials and private individuals. They are often accused of crimes defined in a broad or ambiguos manner, contrary to the principle of legality. Judges also participate in criminalizing defenders when they accept processes without evidence or with claims from false witnesses, accelerate processes with the goal to repress the accused defender, issue arrest warrants without sufficient basis, do not respect the guarantee of reasonable time and subject defenders to lengthy proceedings. In any criminal proceeding, clear proof of the guilt is a prerequisite for the criminal sanction, and the burden of proof should lie with the accusing part and not the accused. When justice operators are confronted with accusations and criminal charges that are clearly unfounded, they are obligated to investigate the source of these arbitrary complaints and impose an appropriate sanction. Doing so will also serve to discourage future abuse of the judicial process and waste of judicial resources. The Commission is aware of statements and assertions issued by authorities seeking to delegitimize the work of H.R. defenders, stigmatizing them before society. The IACHR has noted that States have a position as guarantors of the fundamental rights, and therefore the exercise of freedom of expression by public officials is subject to special duties, including the duty to reasonably verify the facts on which their statements are based. Public officials, especially those in the highest positions, have the duty to respect opinions, even when these are contrary to their interests. In this sense, they should actively promote pluralism and tolerance, inherent in a democratic society. This derives from the obligation to protect the human rights of all people and in particular those in situations of risk, as in the case of H.R. defenders who have been threatened. In several countries in the region, H.R. defenders have faced criminal prosecution for exercising their right of free expression after making complaints alleging human rights violations. The Commission has noted with concern that in some countries of the region, criminal offenses of defamation continue to be used to criminalize and punish statements concerning public officials, which has disproportionately affected the work of human rights defenders. In a State in which the reporting of human rights violations is criminalized in order to protect the honor of public officials, citizens lose an essential tool in the fight for the protection of rights, thus greatly affecting the democratic system.